Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Applied Mathematics
Volume 2013, Article ID 838694, 15 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/838694
Research Article

Proactive Communicating Process with Asymmetry in Multiagent Systems

1School of Computer Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
2School of Computer Software, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China

Received 6 March 2013; Accepted 29 April 2013

Academic Editor: Xiaoyu Song

Copyright © 2013 Jiafang Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. G. Clarkson, T. E. Jacobsen, and A. L. Batcheller, “Information asymmetry and information sharing,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 827–839, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. W. z. J. A. Mirrlees, The Collection of the Theses of James A. Mirrlees, The Commercial Press, Beijing, China, 1997.
  3. X. Fan, J. Yen, and R. A. Volz, “A theoretical framework on proactive information exchange in agent teamwork,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 169, no. 1, pp. 23–97, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  4. M. Wooldridge, The logical modelling of computational multi-agent systems [Ph.D. thesis], Manchester University, Manchester, UK, 1992.
  5. P. R. Cohen and H. J. Levesque, “Teamwork,” Nous, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 487–512, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  6. B. J. Grosz and S. Kraus, “Collaborative plans for complex group action,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 269–357, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  7. B. J. Grosz and S. Kraus, “The evolution of SharedPlans,” in Foundations and Theories of Rational Agency, A. Rao and M. Wooldridge, Eds., pp. 227–262, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  8. H. J. Levesque, P. R. Cohen, and J. H. T. Nunes, “On acting together,” in Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, Mass, USA, 1990.
  9. K. E. Lochbaum, “A model of plans to support inter-agent communication,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Planning for Inter-agent Communication, Seattle, Wash, USA, 1994.
  10. K. E. Lochbaum, Using collaborative plans to model the intentional structure of discourse [Ph.D. thesis], Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1994.
  11. F. Anseel and F. Libvens, “A within-person perspective on feedback seeking about task performance,” Psychologica Belgica, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 283–300, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. L. G. Aspinwall and S. E. Taylor, “A stitch in time: self-regulation and proactive coping,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 417–436, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. L. G. Aspinwall, “The psychology of future-oriented thinking: from achievement to proactive coping, adaptation, and aging,” Motivation and Emotion, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 203–235, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. T. S. Bateman and J. M. Crant, “Proactive behavior: meaning, impact, recommendations,” Business Horizons, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 63–70, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. E. Dutton, S. J. Ashford, R. M. O'Neill, E. Hayes, and E. E. Wierba, “Reading the wind: how middle managers assess the context for selling issues to top managers,” Strategic Management Journal, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 407–425, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. J. M. Crant, “Proactive behavior in organizations,” Journal of Management, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 435–462, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. Frese and D. Fay, “Personal initiative (PI): An active performance concept for work in the 21st century,” Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 23, pp. 133–187, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. A. Hwang and J. B. Arbaugh, “Virtual and traditional feedback-seeking behaviors: underlying competitive attitudes and consequent grade performance,” Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  19. P. E. Levy, M. D. Albright, B. D. Cawley, and J. R. Williams, “Situational and individual determinants of feedback seeking: a closer look at the process,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 23–37, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. G. J. Ruder, The relationship among organizational justice, trust, and role breadth self-efficacy [Ph.D. thesis], Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Falls Church, Va, USA, 2003.
  21. K. D. Stobbeleir, “A self-determination model of feedback-seeking behavior in organizations,” Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series, 2006.
  22. D. VandeWalle, “A goal orientation model of feedback-seeking behavior,” Human Resource Management Review, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 581–604, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. D. VandeWalle, G. N. Challagalla, S. Ganesan, and S. P. Brown, “An integrated model of feedback-seeking behavior: disposition, context, and cognition,” Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 996–1003, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. M. Huth and M. Ryan, Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and Reasoning about Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000. View at MathSciNet
  25. X. Mao, Agent-Oriented Software Development, Tsinghua University Press, Beijing, China, 2005.
  26. M. Wooldridge and N. R. Jennings, “Intelligent agents: theory and practice,” Knowledge Engineering Review, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 115–152, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  27. S. Kraus and D. Lehmann, “Knowledge, belief and time,” Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 58, no. 1–3, pp. 155–174, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  28. S. Kumar, M. J. Huber, P. R. Cohen, and D. R. McGee, “Toward a formalism for conversation protocols using joint intention theory,” Computational Intelligence, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 174–228, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  29. S. Russell and P. Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 2nd edition, 2002.
  30. A. F. Dragoni, P. Giorgini, and L. Serafini, “Updating mental states from communication,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Intelligent Agents VII Agent Theories Architectures and Languages (ATAL '00), Boston, Mass, USA, 2000.
  31. Y. Jin, M. Thielscher, and D. Zhang, “Mutual belief revision: semantics and computation,” in Proceedings of the 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the 19th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, pp. 440–445, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 2007. View at Scopus
  32. R. Wassermann, “An algorithm for belief revision,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 2000.
  33. D. Zhang, Z. Zhu, and S. Chen, “Default reasoning and belief revision: a syntax-independent approach,” Journal of Computer Science and Technology, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 430–438, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  34. R. Gibbons, A Primer in Game Theory, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, London, UK, 1992.